A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage (Sagan)
April 6th, 2008 | Published in Psychology, Quotes, Religion, Science, Truth | 9 Comments
[This quote is a bit long, but I thought it was a good response to paranormal claims.]
“A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage.”
Suppose … I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you’d want to check it out, see for yourself….
“Show me,” you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle—but no dragon.
“Where’s the dragon?” you ask.
“Oh, she’s right here,” I reply, waving vaguely. “I neglected to mention that she’s an invisible dragon.”
You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon’s footprints.
“Good idea,” I say, “but this dragon floats in the air.”
Then you’ll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.
“Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless.”
You’ll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.
“Good idea, except she’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick.”
And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won’t work.
Now, what’s the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it is true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.
The only thing you’ve really learned from my insistence that there’s a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You’d wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least, maybe I’ve seriously underestimated human fallibility….
Now another scenario: Suppose it’s not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you’re pretty sure don’t know each other, all tell you they have dragons in their garages—but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we’re disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I’d rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren’t myths after all…
Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they’re never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself: On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon’s fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such “evidence”—no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it—is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.
—Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World (Ballantine Books: 1995), pp. 171-173.
April 6th, 2008 at 10:12 am (#)
The scope of “evidence” that he’ll accept is small-minded.
According to this example, love would be a dragon in the garage.
Name any “evidence” that your wife loves you and and I’ll give you another way it could legitimately be explained. So what that millions of people believe there’s such a thing as love. There is no “proof” that it exists. They must all be deluded.
So “the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the [love] hypothesis,” right?
To reduce the world to what can be explained scientifically is inhuman. Fortunately, it’s also impossible.
April 6th, 2008 at 2:01 pm (#)
That is a good counterexample, though Sagan is really applying this to paranormal claims like UFO abductions and pseudoscience.
I actually do think there is evidence for love, though of course it all depends on how you define love. If my wife, for example, said she loved me, but cheated on me, spoke poorly to me, and hit me at every opportunity, I would have plenty of evidence to doubt that what she is saying is true. However, if she says she loves me and her actions are consistent with that, then I have evidence that she does really love me.
So I would say the proof of love is in its actions. This is why we can say that an abusive husband doesn’t love his wife even if he claims to.
Or am I missing your point?
I agree it’s impossible to reduce everything to what can be tested scientifically. But I also think that if someone claims they get abducted, they need real evidence, otherwise we have no reason to believe them.
I’m not sure I agree his scope of evidence is “small-minded.” I’m sure he accepts more than lab-testable results. There is also evidence of history, of testimony, of logic, etc.
April 7th, 2008 at 5:17 am (#)
If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it is true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.
You mean, like the evolution story.
Whose proponents will insist (with apoplexy) is testable, as long as by “test” you don’t mean something you can actually, you know, set up, do, and repeat.
April 7th, 2008 at 7:50 am (#)
Holmegm,
I’m often surprised at your comments about evolution. Have you read any good books on evolution apart from creationist authors? Like Bryson or Gould or Miller or Zimmer? It seems like your picture of evolution is quite a straw man.
May 30th, 2008 at 5:28 am (#)
Have you read any good books on evolution apart from creationist authors?
Yes, I have. My position is not based on ignorance, but genuine informed disagreement.
December 4th, 2008 at 3:41 pm (#)
Abraham writes: “To reduce the world to what can be explained scientifically is inhuman. Fortunately, it’s also impossible.”
That says more about the current state of science than it does the current state of the world.
September 6th, 2009 at 8:51 am (#)
Love? No love is not even in the same proof as god. Love is a concept that is ambiguous. Just like the word “hot” or “delicious.” Does delicious exist? Apologists are trying make a god an existent force in the universe. Don’t confuse it with a proof of an ambiguous form.
December 17th, 2009 at 8:52 pm (#)
@Abraham – ‘Name any “evidence” that your wife loves you and and I’ll give you another way it could legitimately be explained’
That’s just it, there is no evidence at all given for the dragon, only the fact that it can’t be disproven- as Josh said there is evidence for love.
July 12th, 2010 at 7:01 pm (#)
Holmegm,
Your lack of knowledge of genetics and the breeding of characteristics in both domestic animals, and domestic agriculture, along with easily reproduced examples in the insect and small animal worlds in response to environment pressures is only proof of you ignorance, not you knowledge of an alternative explanation.
Specific examples fall under the description of “evidence” and they are easily provided. You were even given authors to read for the specifics. If you choose to ignore the information, that is not lack of evidence in any way.